JESUS HAS ADVERSELY LEFT HIS STAMP ON THE CHRISTIAN CULTURE AND PEOPLE AND RELIGION ie THE FOUNDER EFFECT
The Christian faith needs so much fixing that it is wiser to just discard it and start something else. Fixing it will not do away with the, metaphoric, genetic influence and legacy Jesus has left it with. It may be eclipsed and its light may grow time but the spark is there and it will set fire to the forest when you least expect.
Some argue that Jesus never came to start a religion and does not want anybody to follow one. This is nonsense for he was supportive of Jewish religion and practiced Judaism. But did he set up a new faith? The Bible says he did give a set of beliefs, eg in the Lord's Prayer, and wanted people to confess him as the son of God and of David. He called people to be his disciples and that entails a community. As Judaism didn't want this the community became a distinct one in time.
You could say that if Jesus founded this system then fine or you could say he founded it in a passive way for Judaism walked away from it and left his disciples out in the cold left to deal with their own faith and affairs.
So let us go on with the assumption that Jesus founded the Church.
You cannot condemn the Church without also looking at the founder. A bad cruel kingdom needs its king looked at first and foremost. Never underestimate how influence works. It can be poisonous even when the person has long gone. There is a phenomenon here but Jesus and the Church that claims to be his is not the only example but a prime one. Islam is Muhammad and Mormonism is Joseph Smith. It is unexplainable it seems. But it is obvious. It is real. It is toxic. Never underestimate the founder effect.
Jesus commanded the Church to feel his influence and direction. It tries to and imagines he is with it as guide and director. If he had evil in his heart that will appear in the Church.
Jesus supposedly asked for all nations to be offered the Christian faith. Catholic means inclusive and teacher of all. As the Bible is considered the word of God, and it is claimed the Holy Spirit is with those who read it with a heart open to God, it is considered suitable for even young children. But it is not. Jesus we are told in Luke was alarmingly fluent as a child in those evil writings.
Jesus and Mary were participants in the animal sacrifice culture of their religion. They went to the Temple. Jesus was able to quote any scripture text on demand. So he knew that the rites advocating the capture, torture and bleeding of animals were inherently part of his faith. Mary took two doves to get them murdered when Jesus was born. The Old Testament spells out how God says the ritual is to be done. The pornographic detail given in the rites is sickening. The time spent detailing the rites is clearly revelling in this degeneracy. We know that people who kill animals on religious grounds are abusers and guilty of animal cruelty no matter how humane they claim to be. The scriptures are clear proof of how somebody who is an abuser of animals soon starts gutting people too. Moses was bloodthirsty. Jesus declared him his hero and even alleged that he appeared by his side during the transfiguration. If a religion will be banned for saying some pornographic magazines are sacred scripture, why does the Christian social construct get away with it?
Christians would demonise Jews for venerating those scriptures while their religion itself does the same thing and worse.
Jesus, if evil, had nothing to fear from commanding love of neighbour. With the religious abuse of animals being validated by him he knew it was only words.
Jesus said that if you love God, your love will show in how you treat the people he has made. Now if you say God is shown in the people who he has made then it follows that you do not really love God as you think for you cannot know enough people to manage it. You would surely need to know everybody to love God and what they show of him and each person is unique. That is not possible. It is all lies and traps. Jesus knew it could not work. It could not have been meant to. It may work on a small scale but it needs to in order to keep the cycle of harm going on and on.
Jesus made it a core teaching that one man and one woman must stay wed for life for God designed it that way.
In Christianity the marriage bond seeks to create unhealthy relationships in which the husband and wife’s self-esteem depends on one another. It seeks to unite them too much just as Jesus said they have to be one flesh, like one person in mind and feeling and body. In reality, relationships should have a healthy level of detachment. To fall apart and hate yourself because somebody cheated on you or rejected you shows great emotional underdevelopment. You should love yourself and only seek a relationship as a means of loving yourself in a different way. You cannot respect others except in so far as you respect yourself. Marriage is intrinsically abusive and based on the lie that the other person is the one you really want for the rest of your life. This is not true. There are many people out there who could make you happier or as happy. Marriage is hardly anything sacred and bringing God into it to bless it and direct it and authorise it is adding insult to injury.
God
approving of marriage and threatening those who choose to break its promises means he can hardly complain if you abuse a child. The
Christian insistence that all wilful enjoyment of anything sexual outside of
marriage is gravely sinful encourages people to go after children on the grounds
that everybody sins seriously in sexual matters.
The Church teaches that if you go to confession and you want to be forgiven your
sin just because you are afraid of going to Hell or if that is your main reason
that is okay. So in other words, you love the sin but you fear the punishment
which is why you reluctantly give up the sin. But you are still attached to it
and would gladly commit it if the pesky hell threat could go away. How could a paedophile priest feel
bad about his sin of child molestation with a doctrine like that? It would be an
encouragement to the paedophile tendency to feel that he has done nothing wrong.
In the Sermon on the Mount,
Jesus Christ said that to look at a woman lustfully was as bad as adultery
(Matthew 5:28) and that if your eye makes you sin pluck it out (Matthew 5:29)
meaning that this sin should be avoided under all circumstances and no matter
what the inconvenience. Jesus then encouraged extreme guilt about sex and
sexuality. When guilt is that strong what happens is that people will end up
feeling that every sexual feeling they have is a wilful sexual sin. This
philosophy is very harmful to children. It increases the natural tendency of
child-abuse victims to blame themselves and feel they deserved the abuse. Faith
in Jesus Christ facilitates those who want to have sex with children and get
away with it. It has been doing it since it started and it is still doing it
now. Christianity hurts children and destroys their lives by making them feel
worse about the abuse they received than they should. Christianity makes sure
the abuser will destroy their lives.
Despite being frequently into delivering verbal abuse, Jesus insisted that we must see only
the bright side of things and pretend that the evil does not exist. This is
proven when he said that we must be kind to enemies for God sends his rain on
the just as on the unjust (Matthew 5:44-48). He was ignoring the fact that nature is
more cruel than good. It's good is not intentional good but just luck. It
is
not real good though it is nice. We don't need evolutionary theory
to see that every time we take we contributed to some creature
suffering loss eventually. Resources run out. Jesus was
denying the competition by making out God is so sweet as is nature.
It was a bare faced saccharine lie.
Jesus said we must repose on his teachings as on a
rock (Matthew 7:24). His teachings then are as solid and strong meaning
that is how much devotion we must give them, rocklike unshakeable obedience. The
gospel says that this was spoken to ordinary people. This shows that the Sermon
on the Mount in which these teachings occur is to be taken literally for how
else could it be a rock to the ordinary person who needs their morals on a plate
salted and ready?
The only surprise with religious instruction is that not more damage is done
especially to children.
The potential for damage is a very bad fruit and indicates that Jesus was not a
divine emissary for he was the one that said you can tell the prophets of God
who are really fakes by their bad fruits. It is not actual bad fruits that count
the most but the potential ones. After all if it were not for the potential
there would be no actual. It is weird how Jesus would have believed in Old
Testament figures who did evil things like killing while they functioned as
prophets and then tried to discredit bad prophets as fakes. Clearly he was
insecure and was resorting to the fallacy that the badness of a person means
their message is wrong because he had rivals he wanted out of the way.
